Atari/Atari Games VaxMail 1984 Jed Margolin ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::SUTTLES 9-JAN-1984 11:40 To: @SYS$MAIL:COINOP Subj: A neat trick with mail For all of you who use the MAIL program as a form of the "paperless office", I have discovered a bug (pronounced "fea-ture") in same. It seems that the addressee line (TO: ...) is parsed independently of file handling. Mail looks at each item in the list, and checks for a double colon (which specifies node names). Then it does a logical translation of the node name, if any, and goes back to the "we expect a name here" part of the algorithm. The upshot of this is that you can have MORE than one node name on any addressee; this does not apply to list names (in the "@soandso" construct, the soandso must be a legal filename). What good it this, you ask? Well, the normal useful value is zip. Presumably it would just take the mail longer to be sent, cuz it would be routed through a longer path. HOWEVER, if you don't give it a normal name, you can use this feature (pronounced "BUG") in an abnormal way. If you: $ assign " " cc ! for mail then you can send mail To: him, her, them, CC::me, mine and any of the parties involved can have a nodename. The CC:: must have a double colon following it, and can have a nodename following that, for example, "cc::kim::suttles" is valid. The assign statement in the first line of this paragraph is required, either interactively or in your login.com (like I have in mine). The space between the quotes is required, cuz there must be some length to a logical name. The "value" is that you can show some intent in how (and maybe why) you are sending the letter to that person. You could just as easily create a logical name FYI or any other(s) along the same lines. They can be used as often or rarely as you like (to: FYI::him, FYI::her, CC::me, etc.). There is one more thing to consider. This is NOT a documented feature. It may not stick around in future versions of VMS. Then again, it may. I have tested it, and it works as I have described (did I mention you can add them? like: to: him, FYI::CC::ERNIE::you, etc) under the system we are now using. I am not going to stick CC in the system tables, since CC is also a command for compiling C programs (there is no conflict, but people MAY want to use CC as a logical name to point to their C sources, or to other things). FYI and the other possibilities will also not be in the system tables, since I don't know in advance which ones will be used and which won't, and I am also sure that you will come up with some of your own. Also, if DEC changes their mind and it goes away, I can say "I told you so!!". Actually, the real reason I am not going to stick any of that stuff in the system tables, is cuz I'm lazy. But don't tell Shepperd. sas ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::VICKERS 19-JAN-1984 10:53 To: @COINOP Subj: Sound Chips By popular demand, here is a list of sound chips which are or will be available for use in coin-op games: 1. Pokey and Quad-Pokey Price: $1.35 for Pokey, $5 for Quad-Pokey, estimated. Performance?: $0.47 for Pokey, $1.59 for Quad-Pokey. Seriously, 2-4 channels per pokey, depending on whether 8-bit (sound effects) or 16-bit (music) frequency resolution is selected. Square waves and various types of poly-counter noise. Availability: Now. Support: A sound editor exists for the 800, and RPM includes a pokey driver. 2. Yamaha sound chip Price: $15.70 for the sound chip along with a custom DAC, $2.50 less without the DAC, in 10k quantities. Performance!: 32 time-slots (sine wave oscillators) which can be patched together in various ways, to give 16 voices of frequency modulation, or 8 voices with 2 modulators and 2 carriers each, etc. Modulators can modulate other modulators, etc., very flexible. Built-in attack-decay sustain-release envelopes for each oscillator. It is basically the same chip which is used in Yamaha's DX-7 synthesizers, except 10 bit output instead of 12. Each voice can be directed to left channel, right channel, or both (center.) Excellent for music and sound effects, even capable of doing speech with the right preprocessing, although not efficiently in terms of memory storage. Creating interesting sounds is easy, creating the interesting sound you wanted is a little more difficult. FM is somewhat non-intuitive (although there are rough guidelines), and it is difficult to computer analyze a sound and derive the FM parameters (though this may be do-able). However, with good support tools (which exist) and instant feedback of changes in sound parameters, it shouldn't be a big problem. Availability: The legal agreements are being worked out now, there don't seem to be any problems on either side. I will notify people when the deal is finalized. Support: Yamaha will apparently supply one of their new Yamaha Personal Computers along with documentation and software to support the sound chip, which will be available in Japan as an add-on. The Personal Computer is apparently aimed at the low end (under $300) market, uses the new MSX (if I have the right acronym) software standard that the Japanese have all agreed on, and runs Microsoft Basic (in English, no less). The sound development software seems on first inspection to be very professional. The development software will probably include some already designed musical instrument voices (and a few sound effects.) I view this chip as filling in a gap between the obsolescence of Pokey and the availability of Amy, after which time we may wish to use Yamaha, Amy, or both, depending on the game. If I were designing a game for production in 6-9 months I would definately include this chip (as soon as the deal is signed.) We will need for someone (volunteers???) to write a Yamaha driver for RPM. 3) Amy Price: around $8. Performance!: Additive synthesis, 64 harmonics, which can be divided up in various ways among 8 channels. Built-in amplitude and frequency envelopes. Choice of sine or noise for the harmonics. 16-bit output, you can choose how many bits you want to use for your DAC. Easy to analyze a sound and derive the additive synthesis parameters to resynthesize it. Can do high quality speech and singing, though not efficiently. A slight memory and processor bandwidth hog, but very powerful and flexible. Availability: Estimated 1st silicon in June, production quantities in December. As soon as we have 1st silicon, I will begin recommending for people to design Amy into their games. Support: The sound group at Corporate R&D is designing a development system for Amy. An Amy simulator is available now and will be moving over here before long. Some sound analysis and editing software has been written. The Amy development system will be much more powerful than that for the Yamaha, although currently it is aimed more at creating music voices than at sound effects (the same is true of the Yamaha support tools.) Amy will also need a driver to be written for RPM. 4.) TMS 320, TI's digital signal processing chip. Price!: $26.50, 2nd half of 84, in 25k quantities. Performance: It's a great little chip, if you only need to do what it is optimized to do - straight digital signal processing, sum-of-products, etc. It has the advantage of allowing you to use different synthesis techniques to create different sounds. In practice, once all the overhead code gets added in, it is very difficult to get a reasonable number of channels (8) at a reasonable sample rate (18 khz.) I have programmed it with a couple of different sound algorithms - 1) 8 voices with an excitation function of either noise, triangle wave, sawtooth wave, and a stored bandlimited function, followed by either one or two 2nd order bandpass filters. This allows filtered noise (with independent control of center frequency and bandwidth), sine waves from ringing a high-Q filter, and formant effects from filtering the periodic excitation functions. Algorithm 2) is a strange technique using a 2 dimensional waveform table, a surface which you can move around on in various patterns (lissajous patterns, etc.), tracing out the height of the surface at each point. I recently received the D-A board for the 320, and should have my programs modified so I can hear the sounds within a week or two. Assuming the Yamaha deal goes through, the 320 will be dropped as it is more expensive, harder to interface, less powerful, and has no sound development tools. Its only use might be in implementing some kind of fancy adaptive predictive coding technique for cramming mass quantities of sampled sound onto rom or videodisk. And it has much potential for doing vector graphics computation. Availability: Now. Support: I have an evaluation board, with on-board assembler, debugger, emulator, and RS-232 port. There are various macro cross-assemblers available for VAX, from TI and 3rd parties. TI is apparently putting a greater than average effort into supporting this chip. I also have an analog interface board with A/D and D/A. 5.) TI 5220 speech chip Price: $5.50. Performance: 1 voice of voice. Some sound effects can be done as well - the elephant trumpeting pass-by on Star Wars. The sound quality is a little unnatural but preserves some of the speaker's identity and expression. Reverb, noise, and background sounds on the source tape can totally confuse the PASS analyzer. Availability: Now. Support: TI PASS system analyzes the speech and allows the user to edit it, frame by frame. The system typically makes a number of pitch errors, amplitude errors, and filter parameter errors, which have to be cleaned up by hand. It's a fairly slow process, and requires some intuitive feel for linguistics and why we perceive certain phonemes the way we do, etc. There is a 5220 driver for RPM. 6.) Other stuff. Brad Fuller has some (partially debugged) code using a 6502 to implement one channel of adaptive delta modulation. This could use 1 channel of a pokey as a DAC (forced output mode) (4 bit - scratchy sound quality), or a real DAC. Not sure if the 6502 would have time to run RPM too, ask Brad. Could be used for storing voice and some sound effects, higher sound quality than the TI speech chip (assuming a reasonable sample rate), but higher storage requirements - ~15,000 bits (not bytes) per second for 6502 adaptive delta, ~1500 bits per second for TI speech chip. We need some way of A) getting a number (8 or more) of alternate voice (&sound&music) tracks off of a section of video disk, so we can use the same video for a number of different purposes, and B) getting a long passage of sound (10 seconds or so) off of a still frame of video. A) might be done by downloading adaptive delta modulation parameters to a ram and feeding them to a 6502. 8 channels * 15000 bits/sec*channel * sec/60 frames * byte/8 bits => 250 bytes/frame. Can we grab this much or more off a video disk? B) might be done with TI speech chip. Anyone have any ideas or interest in helping with this? (Dave Storie is also interested in this problem.) I welcome comments, suggestions, and offers to write the Yamaha driver for RPM! ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::VICKERS 19-JAN-1984 15:17 To: @SYS$MAIL:COINOP Subj: Sound Chips update Regarding my previous memo, Morgan Hoff informs me that the quad- pokey is actually a $12.90 part. Performance is still under $2.00. Also, the 320 signal processor's cost increases due to the need for high-speed rom and ram and interfacing hardware, depending on the specific application. Earl ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::VICKERS 19-JAN-1984 16:14 To: @SYS$MAIL:COINOP Subj: Sound Chips Update Update Regarding my previous memo regarding my previous previous memo, Jed Margolin informs me that the online manufacturing resource planning system says that the cost of quad-pokeys was $6.90 last time we bought them. If anyone has any more numbers, I would be undelighted to hear them. Caring less, Earl ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MAHAR 26-JAN-1984 11:25 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: Webster, A dictionary program There is now available a spelling checker program. This program takes an English text file and outputs the file with all the misspelled words and their line numbers at the end. There are over 47000 words in the dictionary. This is a lot but not enough to guarantee that your favorite words are in there. So, When you find correctly spelled words marked as not in the dictionary please send them to me and I will update the dictionary. To use this program put the following command in your login.com file: $ WEB*STER :== $DOC:WEBSTR 'P1 Typing WEBSTER file.ext will run the program and process the mentioned file. The default input extension is .MEM. Webster will create a file of the same name with the extension .CRF Please forward any problems and comments to me. I will update the dictionary every couple of weeks. If your favorite words do not show up after you send them to me please be patient. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MAHAR 26-JAN-1984 15:59 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: oops I have been informed that the 'p1 in the command line of my previous message is incorrect and should be removed. The correct line should be: $ web*ster :== $ doc:webstr This should work fine. If there any problems let me know. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MAHAR 27-JAN-1984 11:08 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: Webster, Contractions or possessives It has come to my attention that contractions (can't, didn't, etc) don't work in the webster program. The Dictionary has these words and the program will recognize them if I define the apostrophe (') as an alphabetic character. I have done this and contractions now work. There is, however, a price for this feature. The dictionary does not have all of the possible possessive forms of words. Since the program is able to recognize the word "didn't", it will not find the word "witch's" in the dictionary. I use contractions more then I use possessives. If there is a problem with this I would like to hear about it. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MAHAR 27-JAN-1984 14:19 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: Webster, How about this? Webster can now handle almost all cases of contractions and possessives. If it can't find a word in the dictionary it scans the word and truncates the word at any apostrophe that may be there. For example: "witch's" will become "witch". The dictionary is consulted again with the new word. This leave the only problem being a misspelling like "can'tj". the 'tj is removed and the word "can" is in the dictionary. So, no mention will be made of the word in the listing. If you don't like this feature I will set it back to not handling possessives at all. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::SHEPPERD 27-JAN-1984 15:38 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF Subj: Announcing the new utility MIXIT At long last, the utility we've all been waiting for: MIXIT. Available the next time you log in or restart, it allows you to convert image, .ROM, .EXE or .LDA files into image, .ROM, .EXE, .LDA or .MAC files at the flick of a keystroke. This program answers the ever increasing demand for "how do I put my banked switched program into a 27128?" and the old continuing problem of "how do I get a listing of my .LDA (or .PPS) file for the legal beagles?" The program reads one or more input files and writes a single output file. You specify what MIXIT should include from the input file and where to position the data in the output file. Each input file is processed seperately and inserted into the output file as it is read in. This results in the data from the input file being appended to (or overlayed on) the output file, so some amount of care should be exercised if you plan to be tricky and have sections of data overlap each other. There's four basic commands to MIXIT: HELP, EXIT, OUTPUT, INPUT. The OUTPUT command specifies the filename of the output file and must appear before any INPUT commands. Each occurance of an OUTPUT command starts a new output sequence. The INPUT command specifies the filename of an input file and the data from each is deposited into the previously defined output file. Type MIXIT and use the HELP command to get further information. There's only one error message, and its rather self-explanatory. Happy mixing, ds ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MAHAR 27-JAN-1984 15:41 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: Webster, The great debate I guess I was unclear. Webster will only strip after the apostrophe if the word is not found in the dictionary. Words like can't and didn't will be found in the dictionary so they will not be flaged as wrong. The only inaccuracy is the "can'tj" case mentioned earlier as the word "can'tj" is not in the dictionary. I am reviewing contraction and possessive recognition techniques and all of the suggestions I have received have some flaw in them. Therefore, I am regrouping and will release a new version over the weekend. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MAHAR 29-JAN-1984 15:40 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: Webster, Contractions and possessives the final word. This is the final word on contractions vs. possessives. Webster first looks up a word in the dictionary. This includes any apostrophes that may be in the word. Most of the common contractions are listed in the dictionary and will be found this way. If the word is not in the dictionary Webster checks do see if the word ends in S'. If it does, the ' is removed and a dictionary lookup is done on the root word. If the root is not found in the dictionary the original word with the apostrophe is added to the misspelled list. If the word ends in 'S the 'S is removed and a spelling check is done on the root word. Once again if the root is not in the dictionary the whole word is placed in the misspelled list. This system will catch almost all cases of contractions and possessives. There is one exception, however. A singular word ending in S is, by the rules of usage, made into a possessive by adding 'S. So, the possessive of abacus is abacus's. If you have this correct in your text Webster will not complain. However, A common mistake for this case is to treat the word as if it was plural. ( abacus') This is incorrect but Webster will not flag it as so. This is not a major problem. I have found only a very few nouns that end in S. It is difficult to say words like abacus's so people usually put these words in a prepositional phrase ( of the abacus). The ackwardness of these words has caused most of them to fall into disuse. Spending 10 minutes looking in the dictionary only uncovered a few. ( abacus, lotus, mass, and marquis) I sure there are more but not many. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::FXL 30-JAN-1984 02:01 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: The first annual Jeff Boscole Memorial letter This letter is dedicated to Jeff Boscole, someone who wasn't afraid of sounding obscure, to speak his mind, to be strange, to be brilliant, to play games, and to use MAIL to its fullest. I don't remember when he left, but it was quite a few months ago. To anyone who cares, but especially to game designers with more clout than FXL, and to any and all people in power at Atari (not just coin-op): Recently I have spent an inordinate amount of time trying to instigate improvements in royalties, designer credits, and game testing procedures. I have had little success. I hereby apologize for all of the negative feelings and anger that I am emanating because of this. After all, things are pretty good here, and certainly better than at many companies. I do not however apologize or regret my negative feelings about the recent release of the Crystal Castles 2600 Cartridge. (In case you don't know, the cartridge was released without the approval of the coin-op design team, or anybody else in coin-op as far as I know). This is pure theft! And I do not even know who to blame for this!! It isn't the programmer, who is about as mad (or worse) as I am about this situation. He was given a unmakable release deadline (4 days instead of 3 weeks from when he was told). The game is much worse because of this (according to the programmer Peter Niday). He had no choice in the matter. Yet another unfinished, hurried, poorly tested game from Atari. Won't we ever learn? Games under license from other companies get reviewed by representatives of that company (Williams and Namco specifically). But games developed in-house are treated like they are in the public domain, while the original design team of in-house games is treated like dirt. This is not an isolated incident either. Atarisoft, as a matter of policy, takes Atari Coin-op games, lets outside companies "convert" them for home computers (like Commodore 64, Vic-20, Apple 2, TI-99 and IBM-PC), and then produces them, all without the creative input or advice of the original design teams (just talk to Ed Logg about Centipede, or ? about Battlezone). Atarisoft does not ask anyone over here at coin-op for approval for the final version, but they do show the final version of the game to someone in the legal department. On the more positive side, there is a chance that Atarisoft will contribute to the Engineering Product Bonus Plan in a manner similar to 2600, 5200 and 800 products. Wouldn't it be nice to have that guaranteed and in writing? And shouldn't there be designer credits on Atarisoft products? It's ironic that my name is on the packaging of the 2600 Crystal Castles cart, a product which I only saw an early version of. Yet when I told people that the message ("programmed by Franz Lanzinger") appeared in level 10 in the coin-op version I was told to take it out, or I loose an amount of bonus to be determined. Boy did that make me mad !!! I complained vocally, but only to be promised that a designer credit policy would be worked on. This policy is still "being worked on" eight months later. Now really. It's not that hard to do, just look at movies, books, not to mention Stern, Mylstar, Simutrek, Sente, even 2600 carts. If there were a policy right now, credits could be in in time for the Crystal Castles kits. As it is, I am still mad about the whole thing. Imagine Speven Spielberg directing a film, but not getting credit. How would he feel? Are we cogs in a machine? I am not a number !!! This isn't 1984!! (well OK, maybe it is). While I'm at it I would like to get one more thing off my chest (right on!!). You may know that the current "coin-op engineering product bonus plan" (shouldn't it really be called a royalty plan ?) is out of date. The most recent legally binding document (if it is legally binding) is dated March 26, 1982, and it expired at the end of 1983. It is my understanding by reading that memo that the bonus plan is still in effect, but it can now be " extended, enhanced, discontinued or otherwise modified to meet management objectives ". In other words, Atari has the legal right to screw us any time they want. Personally, I would feel much more secure, happy, and motivated to work hard, if there were an updated royalty plan without a gaping loophole like that. After all, there are plenty of precedents for people getting screwed here. I am tired of fighting a brick wall. So I will resign myself to the facts of life at Atari. These facts seem to be that change is virtually impossible when suggested by a single empoyee, but mindbogglingly fast if management wants it. And I will continue to feel bitter now and then (like right now for instance). How do you feel about all this? How do you feel about 40% 30% 30% (the "golden handcuffs")? How do you feel about 1% under 10M, 2% over 10M? How do you feel about designer credits? How do you feel about the delays in actual payment of royalties? (I still don't have a cent for Crystal Castles, and it has been seven months since it started to earn millions for Atari). What can you, anyone who cares, do to make me, Joe Piscopo (oops, make that Franz Lanzinger) feel less bitter? Well, misery loves company. Please tell me, better yet, tell your favorite manager, supervisor, or even CEO, how you feel about these issues. It may not change a thing, but maybe your powers of persuasion will succeed where mine failed. Until next year, (when I will write the second annual Jeff Boscole memorial letter) FXL (the X stands for "eX trouble maker") P.S. please send your answers to @SYS$MAIL:JUNK, or to someone in a position to take action, best would be both. P.P.S. If there are any inaccuracies, please let me know. The facts are to the best of my recollection, some of it is hearsay. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::VICKERS 30-JAN-1984 15:30 To: @SYS$MAIL:COINOP Subj: Yamaha Sound Chip I now have 3 samples of the Yamaha 2151 FM synthesis sound chip (see my Jan. 19 '84 mail message for details.) Also 3 samples of their 3012 D/A converter. Also documentation for each of these chips (46 pages of hand- written Japanese English, but basically pretty understandable.) The documentation is in the process of being typed up, but if anyone wants to check out a copy of the handwritten version, see me. This is available for coin-op evaluation only; they don't want us competing with their home computer. We should have one of the Yamaha PC's within a couple of weeks, hopefully, and a demo will be given. Earl ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::THOMPSON 31-JAN-1984 10:07 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: Another flame Another Jeff Boscole Memorial letter, in response to FXL's letter on Jan 30, 1984. I was unaware of any policies regarding 2600, Home computer, or any other computer system, nor was I told of any. All I was told about was a bonus plan if the game I worked on was turned into a cartridge. This DOES tend to say that the creating team will have no say in the cartridge. I, for one, would like to have some say in the final version of the game, since I feel very strongly about my game. Since I haven't been impressed by the results of VCS's releases, I DON'T want them to butcher, maim or mutilate my game for whatever reason. I can fully sympathize with Franz, since he put a lot of time and effort into his game. By the time my game goes into production (knock on wood), I will have put at least a year of my life into that game. I don't want someone to come along, and rip me off. I don't really care about royalties from the other games, I just don't want to have to apologize to anyone about a game that has my name in it, on it, or associated with it. Also, since I haven't heard anything from management about the bonus plan lately, I can only assume that Franz's research is correct. Since I happen to have a Team Leader that I feel I can trust, I'm not too worried about getting screwed on the bonus. That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be something in writing. Something my mother taught me - "If you really mean what you what you are saying, then you won't mind putting it in writing." While I'm still flaming, I feel that it WOULD be nice to have my name appear in my game somewhere. It would really be nice to be allowed to do this, since Star Wars had the names of the people appear on every odd wave going into the death star. It seems a little inconsistant to me that the Star Wars project could have their names, and Crystal Castles couldn't. For some reason, that appears to be favoritism, not policy. Return flames gladly accepted. Peter Thompson. P.S. If anyone can show me a good game for the 2600 that we produced, I will fully apologize, and then go out and buy it. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::LOGG 1-FEB-1984 09:54 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: More on FXL letter (or the second biweekly Jeff Boscole letter) Since everyone else seems to be on the subject I might as well add my two bits worth. First, regarding testing and review of 2600, 5200, 800,... software. In the past I was given carts to review, and in some cases they ignored my comments. In particular, for the 800 Centipede I saw a bootleg copy and send my comments back only get see the shit hit the fan because I managed to see the cart which should not have been possible. Months later I was officially given a newer version to test. I noted some problems and asked that the game play match the Coin-Op version in several aspects. I was told that it was too late because they couldn't make the changes in time for the release. More recently I attended a meeting to decide which Millipede cart for the 2600 should be released. The release date was less than a week away and I was told that the programmer had just gotten one version working within the last couple of weeks (and only possible thru 7 day work weeks and considerable lack of sleep). I should also point out that I sent the complete documentation of Millipede to the team leader responsible for the VCS cart months prior to this meeting. I also called and left my name and number with the comment that I was available for any assistance. I received no response until a week or two prior to the above mentioned meeting. This leds me to believe that the game was not ready for help until the time of the meeting (thus verifying the hearsay that the game had just been developed in the last two weeks). Now for the good news! ATARI did select the VCS version of Millipede over the version done by GCC. I was told that GCC was instructed NOT to do this cart but they went ahead and did it anyway. I guess they felt that if they got it done first ATARI marketing would use theirs. Judging from the meeting I attended, I would guess that they were right. In any case I have worked with the VCS programmer since and hopefully the cart has improved. I do NOT mean to say that I necessarily helped but that the cart just needed time. I should point out that the cart was not released due to a bug! Now why didn't we think of this before? That sounds like a good strategy to follow. The only reason I was given why the cart was to be released within a week of the meeting was to have ONE week worth of sales for the first quarter. WHAT A SHITTY, GOD DAMNED, FUCKING CSDKFHAS FHLAVFHJ EXCUSE!!!! What ever happened to quality which the name ATARI is supposed to represent? Where was VCS management?? I would hope that someone would stand up and say "THE GAME IS NOT READY. WE WILL RELEASE IT WHEN IT IS DONE!!" Who are they trying to make look good? Why impress Warner with 1 weeks worth of production, when you can impress the consumer 2 weeks later? It seems short-sighted to make themselves look good at the expense of ATARI's reputation. Well enough of that, I want to get back on the subject of good news. Months ago I also reviewed a Millipede for the 800 (or 5200 I don't remember). I sent my comments back and just last week received a letter back for Richard Frick thanking me and giving me a list of changes they have implemented. When I talked to him he recalled when the comments came back and how the programmer grumbled about doing any more changes. However after the changes were made the programmer has become very excited about the new program. Now ISN'T that a heart warming story. It sure made my week. I hope we see more cooperation like that in the future. Second, as Franz hinted I never received a copy of Centipede to review from ATARISOFT nor was I even told about any Centipede carts. Ignoring the fact that is rather insulting, it is not in the best interests of ATARI. We should demand quality from any product ATARI puts its name on. Considering there is expertise here in Coin-Op to test and evaluate this product, they should be very interested in hearing from us. Since there were no designer credits, I guess it was hard for them to dtermine who to come to but they could have found out. Since there seems to be new policies regarding credits for our games and since there seems to be a lack of trust between certain individuals and management, couldn't we have some WRITTEN information of these policies. In particular, can someone reassure us that the current bonus program is still in effect and will remain so until xxxxx. Can the current policy on credits be written down and include if possible the current policy on credits with respect to 2600, 5200, 800, and ATARISOFT conversions. For everyones information I was not told that my name would appear on the 2600 Millipede documentation. I had to ask Steve Calfee. In fact it seems logical that the names of all members of the Coin-Op team responsible for developing the game should appear. Can someone write down whether the ASTARISOFT software will bring royalties to Coin-OP? Now for my pet pieve, can we get a little better accounting on the bonus program? I was given verbal assurance by John Farrand that this was possible but maybe he doesn't understand how hard or time consumming this is. In the past ATARI didn't want to do this because this would release information that the competition is not supposed to know. In fact if you want to know the VCS sales of a cart, just call your friends at Activision or Imagic or Starpath for the info. I was also told that the other divisions just paid monies to Coin-Op but did not supply the number of units sold or other info. With the new organization I would hope that this information would be available. The kind of information I would like to see with our bonus checks is 1) Coin-Op units sold (at full price) 2) those sold at a loss (thus no royalties for them) 3) Coin-Op kits sold (as above) 4) same for 2600, 800, 5200 and ATARISOFT. Ed Logg P.S. They (Marketing) released the 2600 Millipede on Monday before they could test the cart for the required 40 hrs. There was a screen roll failure after 35 hrs. So by the book they should not have passed the cart for release. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RAY 1-FEB-1984 15:10 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF Subj: Complaints To: Unhappy People From: John Ray Subject: Complaints Date: 1/31/84 I would like to let you all know what the current status is with the complaints that have recently been voiced. I see the complaints falling into the following subjects: 1. Consumer conversion of Coin-Op originals without Coin-Op inputs. 2. Designer credits in the Coin-Op product. 3. Bonus issues. MY VIEWS 1. I agree that we need to have a great deal more involvement in consumer conversions of our products. I talked to Steve about this when he gave me the Crystal Castles Cartrige one working day before it was to be released. He agrees. I'm sure that it will be much more convenient to interact with the Consumer Programmers when they are in our building. I'm sure that the Consumer management and programmers will be happy to hear any input you have on one of your games. For the long term, I will work with Steve to formalize the procedure of giving feedback so that we do not repeat past mistakes. 2. When the Consumer designer credits policy was announced, I was given the task of coming up with a policy for Coin-Op. I did this over Christmas and submitted my proposal to the Team Managers right after the holidays. I incorporated some of their suggestions and submitted the proposal to Dan Van and Steve Calfee on 1/11/84. Dan has submitted my proposal to Skip Paul and John Farrand, but with all the recent organizational changes there may be a longer delay than normal. Please have a little more patience. 3. There are many bonus issues, most of which I have not discussed with Dan Van. He IS looking into getting rid of the "Golden Handcuffs" (40/30/30) and getting an "advance" on royalties. I will discuss with Dan the other issues that have been brought up as well as going over the mail messages received on this topic. I think bringing these issues out into the open is healthy, but I don't want you to feel like you have to have a revolt to get me or Dan to listen to you. Dan always personally answers any written messages you send to him. I always answer questions to the best of my ability, and take questions to Dan that I cannot answer. I was already addressing the issues that Franz has brought to my attention. The problem is that these types of things take longer than you would expect. You may think that it is absurd how long things take, but remember that designing a game also always takes longer than anyone expects. One last comment, courtesy of Chris Downened: "Junk" goes to lots of people who do not participate in the Product Bonus Plan at all. They may not appreciate hearing about our concerns regarding this plan. It might be better to use "@sys$mail:engineer.uaf" or a similar restricted audience. Thanks!! John ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::DOWNEND 1-FEB-1984 17:22 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF to: Franz from: Chris Downend Subject: Response to Boscole Memorial Letter First of all, rest assured the issues you mention ARE being worked on - they are constant topics at meetings I attend. Everybody seems to be involved in making decisions these days. This ensures all viewpoints are heard but with a horrible speed penalty. The solution is to keep plugging away and enlist support as you have! By the way Franz, you are certinly a valued employee with clout - one thing Atari undeniably values is people that can produce successful products and you have certainly done that with Crystal Castles. I have unique perspective on the situation since I have programmed games at the "bottom" and at the same time I have seen the decision-making process at the "top" - I can empathize with both sides. One word of caution though, I note that you suggest dialogue thru VAX and the "Junk" heading which routes the text to everybody on the VAX including employees who do not share in the Product Bonus (royalty) and they just might not appreciate hearing about our lofty concerns about credits and amounts of bonus since they get neither. May I suggest the @sys$mail:engineer.uaf heading or a similar restricted audience. Management must be sensitive to the feelings and desires of many diverse groups inside Engineering and this complicates and lengthens the decision-making process. A snap decision to address the issue bothering one party may upset another party - management has to consider the whole picture sometimes. On Royalities: Yep, Atari can screw us anytime they want. I do not think they would for fear of a lot of people leaving. The Company has to protect itself. Please realize that thru much of 1983, Atari paid bonuses even though Coin-op was not making money - we were operating in the RED and still paying bonuses ! Now thats commitment. Of course that cannot go on for too long or else the whole Company goes down. That's the reason Atari has escape valves built in to Bonus plans - it's not really too screw the employee, but instead to protect the well-being of the Company. That's the price you pay for the luxury of a steady salary and a ready-made work environment including PEOPLE and technical support. Personally, I have not been screwed, and in fact I have found that Atari has handsomely rewarded hard work and a willingness to support the Company. Maybe my expectations are lower than those who feel screwed - or maybe they valued themselves more than they were really worth. Management does care and Changes are in the works, they just take a long time especially when the players keep changing( J. Ray becomes Director, then Calfee leaves, then Farrand leaves etc. - you have to keep re-educating the new players). Changes ARE underway (no promsies, but people want to fix these things if possible): -get rid of golden handcuffs -generate an advance close to initial production As for the "millions" Atari made on Crystal Castles, well lets see: sales as of 1/13/84: 4363 uprts; 450 cocktails sales revenue (approx): $2095*4363 + 1695*500 = $9.98M [price was reduced in DEC(?) to $1000(?)] cost of goods sold(fully burdened):$971*4363+971*500=$4.73M Engineering Expense for Crystal Castles: about $1M Engineering Expense for games that don't make it: unknown Sales/Marketing Expense: unknown Engineering Bonus expense:(.015*9.98M)=.15M Pre-tax Income: 9.98-(4.73+1+.15)= $4.1M After taxes (50%): $2.05M So the Company retains earnings of a couple of million to get thru the many dry spells this industry faces or to buy new equipment etc. Also note that Atari had to build about a 1000 games to break even on the Engineering costs. Thus, profit doesn't really appear until 1000 games are built, but Atari pays bonus anyway. I agree 7 months is a bit long to wait, but Atari has not made all that much and the product was not profitable until long after the intial production started. Product Bonus was paid quarterly at one time; we should go back to that scheme. As for the 1% or 2%, I don't see a problem there - after all, Atari doesn't start making any significant money on a product till a few thousand are sold so it makes sense to reduce bonus funding till a thresold is crossed. I would however like to see another threshold at about $50M when the percentage increases to 5%. A game that can generate that much sales is a spectacular achievement for the creators and they deserve the reward at that point. The Quality of 2600 carts is the pits - no doubt about it. The system was introduced in 1977 so it is SEVEN years old. I think Breakout and Space Invaders are decent renditions of the coin-op originals and those are 1976 and 1979 games respectively. But with 14 million 2600's out there, financial issues outweigh asthetic issues. I don't think the public would even buy Crystal Castles on a 2600 so everybody loses - you and Atari. Again, we've got new management and they have to learn from their own mistakes. By the way, Calfee knew the 2600 Crystal Castles was lousy and tried to stop it, but he was overuled. When Marketing wanted to do the same thing with Millipede (release the cart with a bug), Steve had to go all the way to J.J. Morgan. Fortunately, Morgan agreed with Steve and the release was postponed. One thing to remember though, Coin-op profits are small potatoes compared with Comsumer profits so every decision is heavily weighted toward maximizing profit in the Consumer arena. So, anticipate feeling screwed with respect to the quality of carts - it won't change - too much money is a stake. The virtue of Coin-op is extensive creative freedom (in game design and hardware base) since original work is the lifeblood of the Industry. Coin-op also gives you bearable schedules allowing you to do a satisfying job. And to my knowledge, Coin-op has yet to sacrifice quality to get an on-time delivery. Firefox was supposed to start production 1/23/84; millions in parts are all staged ready for production, but it has not started (1/31/84) because the software is not ready. Now for Credits: Coin-op credits are more complex than Consumer credits since more people are involved and people get their feelings hurt if they are left out and they feel they contributed just as much as so-and-so and so-and-so got their name on the game... see my point? John Ray has been working on this as well as trying to learn about being a Director and managing the Project Office. Maybe its could have happened faster, but John manages by concensus which takes even more time. John has apparently sent his recommendation to Van Elderen/Paul/Farrand for appproval prior to publishing the rules for credits on the audio-visual portion of the product. How does seven names in video for the audio-visual portion strike you?? We do not want 8kbytes of EPROM used up putting 500 credits in the game. By the way, Star Wars got their names in the game because they did it and did not tell anybody about it. If your ethics were equally low, Franz, you could have done it in Crystal Castles too. What's all this mean? I don't know. I hope it helps though. - Chris Downend ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::WHITEBOOK 2-FEB-1984 12:30 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF Subj: BOSCOLE II I'll jump in at his point in the discussion re: BONUS. Many of you may not know this, but after devoting my first year here to developing the graphics and gameplay on a game which sucessfully made it intoproduction (MAJOR HAVOC), I was quite suprised to find out accidentally during an unrelated hallway encounter that I WAS NOT BEING CONSULTED AND/OR EVEN INFORMED AS TO BONUS DISTRIBUTION. Of course, this problem has since been rectified. However, if I had not inadventantly asked JUST THE RIGHT, SPECIFIC QUESTION to the RIGHT PERSON at the RIGHT TIME, it would have been too late to DO anything at all about BONUS! In addition, during the negotiations on that delicate subject of BONUS PARTICIPATION, several unexpected suprises kept poking up their noses. What this means is, of course, that the system as it has been known in the past is now in a period of flux. From my standpoint, that's all for the better. Now, in the aforementioned BONUS MEMO which makes provision for modifications as management decides is fitting and proper, I would like to point out that it makes a special and specific mention of the broadening of the CORE GROUP CONCEPT to include the new significant contributors to today's modern coin-op games, i.e. ANIMATORS. Of course, it doesn't guarantee that just any lackluster tell-me-what-to-do-and-I'll-draw-it-for-you attitude will be rewarded indiscriminately, but creative incentive and contribution to a game is something that JUST CAN'T BE IGNORED... unless one wants to supress creativity it must have room to flourish and IT MUST BE PROPERLY NOURISHED. (This means BONUS) So, if the GOLDEN HANDCUFFS don't fit right anymore they should be reshaped to fit with the loving skill of the patient craftsperson... but they should be fixed right. Thanx, Barry ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::SUTTLES 2-FEB-1984 13:42 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF Subj: BOSCOLE MCMLXXXIV I have been watching these soaps with some interest. I find a wry humor in them which might just be unique, and would like to share this with you. Some background context: At all the places where I worked before (in a "production" shop, either as an applications programmer or as a systems programmer), there was no bonus program. I was considered to be a very low level of management, and thusly was paid a salary. Consistent with that, if the job required extra effort, I was expected to put out that extra effort, cuz it was my job. That was part of the commitment. When things went well for the company, I enjoyed better job security. When things didn't go as well for the company, I did my best to correct that where I could. It was part of my job. It wasn't till I came to Atari that I was involved in any bonus plan at all. Since I do not contribute directly to the end product, I am not eligible for bonuses of the type that is currently under fire. To keep me from grumbling about it, and to prevent me "defecting" to games programming, I am under a "management discretionary" bonus program. This translates to: If I do a good job, I get a good bonus. If I don't, I don't. My first bonus at Atari really blew my socks off. I had no idea what to expect; I was anticipating a $25 or $50 Christmas gift. (On the other hand, you guys that are handing out the bucks, now I know, and now I would take it poorly.) It is still nothing close to the product bonuses that you guys are so upset about. No, I am not going to give any more hints than that. Now for the things that amuse me: My overwhelming reaction is simple. A bonus is a bonus. I get paid to do my job. I am not entitled to a bonus, by definition, unless I do my job better than is expected (and no such thing as a sliding curve). If I happen to be better than the average joe, and stay that way consistently, I wouldn't want managements expectations to rise to my superior level, IN MY CASE ONLY. After all, if I was worse than the average joe, their expectations might sink ("Don't give it to Suttles, he'll screw it up") but their standards wouldn't--I would just be a little less likely to survive any layoffs. A "bonus" is like a tip in a restaraunt--the waitress cannot rely on it, it isn't automatic, and she can destroy any chance of getting one by just not trying hard enough...which can be a direct result of believing that the tip is a fixed amount and guaranteed. You guys are unbelievably lucky. I can't speak for the rest of the Bay Area, but in the places I worked before (in the MidWest), such a feud as this could not happen. People who have the gall (guts if it worked) to stand up in a crowd and shout "management is screwing us" usually find that from that instant onward, management is SCRUPULOUSLY honest and consistent. They ensure they make no mistakes, and fire the sucker by the book. Our management here is constrained by circumstance not to point out what I think is obvious (a bonus is a bonus). But they are NOT constrained to agree with the outspoken few (even tho there were a lot of letters, there are lots more who haven't spoken up). They are not required to support either the point of view of the people. They have a company to run. They have to make the company profitable, which takes a LOT of justification to "give away" bonus money of any quantity. They could quite legitimately tell you guys "TOUGH &^$%@" (sorry, Ed), and be quite within their legal, AND MORAL rights. The point is that I can't fully put myself behind the revolution, although I would DEFINITELY like to see everyone come out happy. (If you think I'm going to say bonuses are revolting, think again!) It is only here at Atari that such a discussion could come out well, and there ain't that many places where such a discussion could exist at all. Two final points: NOBODY wants to put out a shoddy product, or even a product that is less than it could be. And did anyone consider that since the merge, a lot of the people against whom the shoddy products are blamed, are on the mailing lists? Personal note to DanVan: When do I get the other half of my money? Steve Suttles ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RICE 2-FEB-1984 15:17 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF Subj: RE: BOSCOLE MCMLXXXIV Well, a touch of sanity (old school style) at last. Actually, I, too, have been very pleased with my Mgmnt Disc boni, but it also pleases me that my boss thinks I do some decent work and can show it in that way. But it certainly comes under the heading of "cake frosting". What I hope comes out of this is a greater commitment to quality of product--- that's what really feeds us all. There are still too many guys saying "I don't care, it's good enough, I just wanna get it out of here!" Those are the ones who burn my butt! ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RAINS 2-FEB-1984 17:17 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF Subj: ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE Since there seems to be a lot of discussion going on about various people's lack of satisfaction at Atari, I thought I might add yet another viewpoint. I realize that having been in "management" for so long, and most recently becoming a "fellow" ("GUY" for short?), whatever the hell that is, that any viewpoints I express are suspect. Still, I might be able to add some insight due to my ten years at a little company that made good in spite of itself. First, as regards bonuses and all related monetary matters, I can say without hesitation that the formulation and administration of the engineering bonus program at Atari is absolutely the worst, most trying and exasperating, most thankless job I ever had to do. The gripes, fears, accusations, and general grief that the management of coin-op engineering has had to go through in the administration of the various plans is something I would not wish on an enemy. (I still feel a twinge of guilt over dumping it in Dan's lap a year-and-a-half ago.) In all the time I was handling the plan, I could only make out one general rule: THE MORE MONEY A PERSON MADE IN THE BONUS PLAN, THE LESS HAPPY HE/SHE WAS ABOUT IT. I received nothing but gripes from the people with the big bucks, while the people who got considerably less, and worked their butts off in support of our products were genuinely thankful. Basically, what I'm trying to say is that if people could give Dan and the other managers some support and thanks occasionally regarding the bonus plan that the management team would be very willing try to make the system work better for you when you had a problem or suggestion. As regards credit for games, I am concerned that if we are not careful, we will find ourselves in an industry which is as screwed up as the motion picture industry. Too many people in that business are out strictly for themselves. There is no team work on many sets because of one or another cast members who insists on taking more credit or attention than any human should expect, and EVERYONE is vitally concerned about CREDIT (even before quality, in many cases). The one thing that I have always enjoyed at Atari is the true camaraderie of the engineering group in Coin-Op. It was the friendships and team attitudes which made Division Street a fun place to work. (Ask an Old Timer what Division Street was.) All this may sound a little strange coming from the man who "stole" the credit from Ed Logg for the Asteroids project. Let me digress briefly on this point. At the time when I was doing interviews and being given sole credit for Asteroids, this company was run by a man who did not trust engineers, and had a paranoia about letting the world know who our game designers were. I was (for whatever reason) on the "approved" list as an engineer who could do interviews with the press. I was not, however, allowed to name names of the engineers or programmers within our department. My standard response to the press was that I was a member of the team of people who created Asteroids, but our own P.R. department, and the lack of other names to associate with the product resulted in my getting credit for much more than I ever claimed or felt. My position on the subject, now as then, is that I did in fact INVENT Asteroids (i.e., came up with the idea), but Ed Logg CREATED the game (i.e., turned an interesting idea into a successful product), with help from the rest of the team and other people in engineering. The part about "...with help from the rest of the team..." is significant. I am concerned that when and if the credit is given, it will get screwed up as it has in the case of Asteroids. There will be hard feelings between people who feel they deserved more credit than they got (especially if they got none at all). I think that while individual credits may be important and necessary for individuals, it may be the beginning of the end of good team feelings and cooperation within the game design groups. WATCH OUT! Finally, as regards coin-op programmers reviewing the consumer products before they go out, how could I possibly disagree that the coin-op guy needs creative approval (control?), especially when his name is going on the box. We wouldn't want to be embarrassed now, would we? Steve Calfee and his Damned Consumer Division Software Assholes can shove it if they think they can get away with this kind of insolence. LONG LIVE COIN-OP, THE REAL ATARI!! We can start another interdivisional Holy War at the drop of a hat (or the drop of a game cart?). Back to the good ol' days of them 'n us! Sure, we'll share the building, but share ideas? Sacrilege! They can blow it out their VCS's! Or maybe we could join forces and revolt against "marketing" or "management" or some other dark and evil force in the company who is taking an unenlightened approach to running the business. It's so easy to see and address the whole scheme of things (the pressures of running a factory, answering to stockholders, balancing the corporate budget, forging a new corporate management structure and a new corporate environment in the wake of one of the most embarrassing fiscal performances of recent history, and doing so with the lingering morale problems, etc.) from the engineering building in Milpitas. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::SUTTLES 2-FEB-1984 17:57 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF Subj: RE: Blow it out your console I like the idea of them .vs. us. How about the US from Atari, and the THEM from those other corporations that are taking away our sales, thus income, thus profits, from whence all bonus comes? Why do we have to do ourselves in when we could be doing them in instead? sas ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::FXL 3-FEB-1984 00:58 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: ? Hello again. I am overwhelmed. What a can of worms!! Jeff Boscole would be proud. Unfortunately, I don't have time to respond to everything that has been broadcast in MAIL recently. Nor should I, after all, I am supposed to be an ex-trouble maker. Still, I am glad that so many of you took the trouble to write down what is on your mind, and then broadcasting it. Scary, but worthwhile. This message is going to the JUNK mailing list, as did the Jeff Boscole memorial letter. I was unaware that JUNK included via DECNET a number of other VAXes. If I had known, I would have sent the JBML to JUNK anyway. I feel no need for secrecy. Better to be in the open than to create inaccurate rumors. If you JUNK readers out there are not interested, just type del after the first page of a message and the message disappears. Someone pointed out to me that it is my responsibility to inform the JUNK subscribers of the prompt responses by John Ray, Chris Downend, and Lyle Rains to the concerns voiced by the earlier MAIL. These responses were mailed to ENGINEERING.UAF, a mailing list which includes only Kim Newvax users. A printout of some of these responses is posted in the home-computer section of 1501. Please don't blame me if you feel left out of the discussion. Fight for royalties if you feel that you deserve them. Fight for getting credit for your work. I am all for personalizing all of industry, everyone should put their name to their work, good or bad. Above all fight for quality. Quality sells, or are we in it just to make a quick buck? If you feel envious that we in engineering receive royalties, consider that we (in coin-op) don't make millions, only thousands, if we are lucky. We earn these royalties by working day and night, sometimes it seems putting our whole lives into it. Even for a successfull game designer, half the time the things don't even see production. Usually that means a year or two down the drain. If you are unsuccessful you get no royalties, only the nagging question: why didn't it work? If the game sells, you don't know why either. Either way, you don't feel secure about the whole thing. And nobody knows where the industry will be three years from now. Can you blame us then for fighting for our second in the spotlight while the power is still on? Without game designers Atari would not exist, just like without a screenplay you'd have a pretty dull movie. "A video game is not a toaster" Sincerely, Franz X Lanzinger ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::FXL 3-FEB-1984 02:54 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF Subj: you guessed it Hello UAF (whatever that means) Again, I'll say that I don't have time to answer everybody in writing, but I can't resist another contribution to the maelstrom of verbiage. I appreciate the rather quick response from the management end of things. But I've heard enough of 'we are working on it'. We game designers work under tough deadlines all the time, we have to show continuous progress, but you guys just say 'we are working on it'. I've been patient long enough. It's time to be impatient. Is Atari really in the 50% tax bracket? Or do you think I'm stupid, Chris? Either way, I second Ed's motion for better accounting of royalties, if and when we receive them. And I don't want to hear some bull about secrecy. Why should our competition know more about sales figures than we do? Maybe the real reason is that there just might be a few dollars missing here or there? Not that I am accusing anyone of foul play, but the potential is there, and foul play has occurred at this company (as in any large company) in the past. Regarding bonus vs. royalties: Are we engineers, or entertainers? Are we grammarians, or writers of best sellers? Are we animators or in-betweeners? A bonus is icing on the cake for a job well done. Royalties are well deserved rewards for directly causing huge profits (or at least a huge positive difference in losses) for a company that is part of the entertainment industry. Royalties are guaranteed by contracts, or at least in some legally binding fashion. I move that guaranteed royalties be paid to us, the in-house people responsible for the development of our games. This would be in line with standard practice in the entertainment industry. I don't really care about the specifics. 1% of that, 3% of the other, whatever. As long as there is some kind of consensus of fairness, and knowing that the rug won't be pulled from under you. And a large payoff for a really big hit would be a great incentive. We all dream of making another Centipede. Too bad that all the big hits (30K units or more) happened under the old bonus plan. This is a hit business. The similarities with the movie industry can't be ignored. Why, we are even owned by Warner. We are entertainers. I program because I have to do that to make the game do what I want it to do. If I could do that in English with voice input, the job would be more pleasant, but it would be essentially the same. If the game is fun to play, its because I made literally thousands of decisions along the way, listening to hundreds of suggestions. If those decisions balance out into a game that people who play coin-ops like to play, if it is tuned so that it earns well, and for a long time, then we sell bunches of them. If the game isn't fun, if it is tuned poorly, if it "cheats", then forget it, you can have an outstanding cabinet, and excellent manual, not a single hardware problem, but people won't put very much money into it. I shouldn't forget the tremendous importance of quality animation and sounds. Our truly amazing animators and equally astounding sound effects and music people deserve much more credit (this includes royalties) than they are presently getting (note Barry's message). Without Barbara Singh, Bentley Bear would still be a robot. And the gem-eaters would still be dropping their pants. Oops, it's almost 3 a. m., time to get to work. FXL ___________________________________________________________________________ From: ERNIE::CAMERON 3-FEB-1984 09:32 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: Aview from the Gruntz Since this seems to be the medium for voicing one's opinion, here's mine. I DO understand that the game programmer is the so called "creator" of the game. But what would your great program do without the hardware, display, power supply, animation, audio development, graphics, cabinet, harness, tech support, and etc!!! What we design here is a PRODUCT. Every person in this building (and those shoved off to 790) plays an important role in the whole process. The team effort is NEEDED to meet our ridiculous schedules. As soon as someone is "better" than someone else the whole system suffers. The game "team" works on one project for a year or more. They are allowed to slip schedules as they go. They get to pick what project they want to work on (generally). They have to answer to their team leader and marketing. I get every project. I don"t get the luxury of saying, "Oh, I don't want to work on that game." I have firm deadlines. They rarely get slipped. You talk about working your butt off, I work my butt off on every project. The vast majority of Design Services hasn't seen the sun in many months. I have worked here over five years and have NEVER misses a set deadline. And who do I answer to? I am fair game for abuse from: Manufacturing Marketing Planners Buyers Customer Service Ireland Manufacturing Components Team Leaders Engineers Vendors Brownsville Sales Reps other Design Groups my Management Some days I want to take my phone and shove it right.... I would like to address the two specific topics at hand, first CREDIT. I think as soon as you give exorbitant credit to a "few", you slap everyone else in the face. Where do you draw the line on who gets credit? Some say the difference is creativity. Designing anything involves creativity. But when you get to the bottom line any design is performing a task. I'm sure most of you reading this think that my job involves no creativity. If that was true I would get a new job. I am constantly researching new methods and new products to improve the quality and cost of my product. Often I am thrown problems that can't be solved without getting "creative". And i do like getting involved in other aspects of Enginnering that are more creative. I don't just "do-my-job". If you are going to give credit for creativity, then everyone of us that walks by a game and says, "gee, wouldn't it be neat if the guy swung from the trees upside down!" has helped. And what about all the people that were creative for a year or more but Atari chooses not to produce their game? A lot of the time it isn't necessarily their fault it wasn't marketable. BONUS A bonus is a bonus. I would love to get much, much more. I'm not included in the game bonus. The reason must be because.......I don't do anything (?) Love and Kisses, Giggles and Wiggles, Carole ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::OLIVER 3-FEB-1984 10:37 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF Subj: VIEW #1243. Here's another view on royalties and bonuses. But first I should tell you that I'm a them. I've done VCS carts for several other companies and just completed a computer game for Atari. I'll give you my definition of royalty and bonus for what it's worth (so to speak). BONUS: Something of value given to someone for a job well done. Keyword - given. ROYALTY: A method of payment for a service performed. Companies don't give money away, they earn it or should. If a company could get away with paying employees 10 cent a day they would and should because that's the U.S. way. The reason a company pays royalties is to retain and keep key personnel. Royalties are not only given to entertainers and artist, but to anyone who is a short commodity. Salesmen recieve commissions in addition to other compensations in order to attrack and keep the best. Top level executives recieve stock options to attrack and keep those few who have the talent to turn a little into a lot. My point is that royalties are earned. And I get very upset when people refer to royalties as a gift. It's like the gifts I give my Doctor, Lawyer and IRS. People who see royalties as a gift either don't warrant a royalty or are very naive about their worth. I also resent opinons that someone who recieves a royalty would think they are more important or even more vital to the company. I believe Atari's management (present history) is fair and concerned. But, I also know that chaos is Atari's only communication system and therefore policies take forever to be drafted. So I think we should keep after what we want, but I don't think it's time to burn the place to the ground. Dan ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RUBIN 3-FEB-1984 11:07 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: a different view...... BONUS. Noun 1: Something that is given in addition to what is usually or strictly due. 2:a Brit: Dividend b: Money or an equivalent given in addition to an employees usual compensation. c: a premium given by a corporation to a purchaser of its securities to a promoter, or to an employee d(1): a government subsidy to an industry. 2: a government payment to war veterans. 3: A sum of money in addition to interest or royalties charged for the granting of a loan or privilege to a company, or for the leasing or transfer of property. That is Webster's 7th definition of the word bonus. I do not see anywhere in that definition where it says that Atari (or any other company for that fact) MUST pay a sum of money to an employee based on sales of a product designed by that employee or employees. (hey Lyle, I made big bucks and I'm am for sure NOT complaining!!!) Now don't get me wrong. I know alot of you will now say..."sure...you did ok by the plan, its easy for you to say". But that is not the point. I waited almost 6 years before I got a product which made bonus. I did not expect EVER in the 6 years to be paid a bonus and I did not stay at Atari for the bonus either. I got lucky enough to have a product which made bonus for me at the right time and the right place. For that Bonus I am thankful to Atari. However, I do not think that any of you would NOT be working at Atari if there were NO bonus plan. I know that it was not really a decision when I started working here! I think the bonus plan is a great idea, and now that I've been included I might feel differently if it were to go. However, we are all paid a nice salary to do our job..... .....DESIGN GAMES. Bonus is exactly what the definition says it is...EXTRA. If you are designing a game strictly for the bonus it will earn you, then you are in the wrong business! Ok....Atari has a BONUS PLAN. They have always had some kind of incentive plan for the designers of games. I would not want to see it go. And since most of you did come onto Atari knowing that there was some sort of plan, it may be a very good reason to stay now. But lets give Management a break here. I am sure John Ray, Steve Calfee and Dan Van have had it up to the top of their heads with grips. If Atari is going to have a plan, I feel somewhat sure that the plan will be in the best interests of both the company and the designers!!! I have LOTS AND LOTS of gripes with the plan myself. I do not like the way it distributed for example. I am fairly sure that no matter what plan were to become, there would always be gripes. Not everyone is going to be happy all of the time! So...I must agree with Steve Suttles in his feelings that we should feel lucky to have ANY plan at all. After all, it is a BONUS, not a ROYALTY!! Maybe we should change the subject of these gripes to suggestions for what you might like to see in a bonus plan. Who knows, it just might get somewhere!!! As for credit on the games.....Who cares????? How many of you sit through the credits at the end of a movie or TV show. How many of you read every credit in a book?? Who is the best reporter for the S.J. Merc.?? Damned if I know!!! Part of me says "yea, credit might be nice", but then I think about it a bit longer. I use to joke about a credit screen, with 50 or so names running up the screen after each game: Designed by: Programmed by: Engineered by: Graphics by: Animation by: ..........................etc Gads!!!! What a bunch of junk!!!! I really don't care if my name gets on the screen or not! But I know that if names were to start showing up on screens, one would have to be very careful not to leave ANYBODY out!!! I don't want that responsibility in my program! And what happens to credits when you need to squeeze 100 more bytes into a program???? Maybe we could just print a small box on the side of the game with everybody's name in it??? WOW!!!! My only gripe with credit is that Atari did not want our names used in the media if we were interviewed. That is no longer a restriction! There is no more gripe!!! The bottom line????? This has all gotten way to far out of hand. Are the rest of you really only staying at Atari for the money and the credit?????? Owen ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::LIPSON 3-FEB-1984 11:19 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF Subj: e just after i wrote this, I read Owens... Owen, me too. excerpts from what I wrote that Owen didn't say: No 'creative' person here is taking any risks beyond a lowered reputation (and less job security, Steve) while working on a project. The company has all legal and considerable moral claim to all profits made on a project where it assumed all costs of development. The long hours everyone works in the 'creative team' are really self-imposed and maintained more by peer-pressure than by orders from management, so don't try bitching to me that you are owed for them. Most exciting projects come either with explicit targets (eg. FIREFOX or GARGOYLES) or are pushed because you'll be able to do more projects and get better marketing/manufacturing response by speeding development. If it really bothers you to work under those deadlines, only work on projects where you yourself can propose a schedule you can meet with an acceptable amount of work. Since no-one around here is willing to refuse to meet 'unrealistic' schedules, everyone has worked excessive hours on occasion- but most DONT make overtime pay- you do it because you think it will pay off in: better product/better support/you won't look like an asshole for agreeing to a deadline and missing. Anyone who really wants more credit than ATARI is willing to give, or more money than ATARI is willing to give, must take the risk that other ATARI expatriots have taken and assume more risk (that is, COST) of development. Then you have all the control you want. Remember, 'your' game is ATARI's, and milking it for all the bucks it can is the prerogative the company has. I'm all in favor of pressuring the company for as much bonus as we can get. Just as in baseball, the burden is not on the players to resist making unreasonable demands- it's on the owners to determine what the company can afford. I think the issue of credits would have been best left to the realm of the individual game designers, and let the team fight it out without management interference. I don't see anything but stupidity in failing to consult a coin-op designer in developing a cross-over game; at least smile politely at his input before it's ignored. BUT don't let this issue get too deeply under your skin. Some anger is appropriate in redressing particular issues, but don't generalize it into a feeling that you're working in an environment where you're sure to be burned sooner or later. I've worked before where people bitched too often and were unable to fully enjoy their work- and I'm not there anymore. Nothing can ruin everyone's work environment more than an unwillingness to feel rewarded by what you're doing, regardless of bonus or salary. Ever since I've been here this discussion has simmered, occasionally boiling. It will continue to do so. Like your mama used to say, think of the starving Armenians (didn't your mother say that?) and eat your food. Noone here is out to get anyone- it's a big group of people with very diverse perspectives on what a product is and who's responsible for what. The diversity is also a benefit- we are exposed to a great range of disciplines here, with a lot of resources to devote to various loosely related products/projects. Don't blow it. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::PETROKA 3-FEB-1984 11:33 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: a response to Rubin I sit and read the credits at the end of movies. -CP- ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::LOGG 3-FEB-1984 11:42 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: Guess? This has gotten out of hand! I am NOT mad at Atari about the Bonus program or credits. Personally if I added my name it would be hidden away where you would be lucky to find it. I was mad at the marketing management for their lack of quality control but there was some good news! My goal was to get the issues out in the open and to get people thinking, NOT make them mad at management. Now this is my last message on the subject because I have work to do. If you have comments please see me and we can discuss them. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MAHAR 6-FEB-1984 10:12 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: Webstr, New words The file [MAHAR]NUWORDS.DOC lists the new words that have been added to Websters dictionary. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::FXL 6-FEB-1984 16:19 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: apology and fate I'm very sorry that I offended some of you. I am relatively new here. I lead a sheltered life over here, I bet a lot of you out there do too. The many many people who work here all contribute in various ways to our successes and failures. Team-work is essential. Regarding game credits, there are many advantages to having no credits at all (except of course the Atari name, not to mention whoever the game was licensed from). The biggest advantage seems to be that noone will be upset that they aren't included. Still, credits are inevitable. They will come, sooner or later. The process has already begun. Many other video-game and even computer software companies have credit policies. Atari home cartridges even have credits on the boxes, or in the manuals. And the day will come when live actors will appear in video disc games. It would be difficult to hide the names of those actors, not to mention that they probably would be members of the screen actors guild. Regarding royalties, or bonus, may the better company win. Imagine a company that gives credit and royalties where credits and royalties are due, namely to everybody, on a project to project basis. Such a company would attract the best people, then produce the best entertainment products, and then stomp the competition into the ground. I hope that company will turn out to be Atari. Sincerely, (until next year) Franz ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::FXL 6-FEB-1984 23:17 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: PPS data crunching Hello PPS users, There now is a way to bypass the conversion on the PPS and do data conversion on the VAX instead. This means that you can take the original .PIF files that the animators work with, transfer them (without converting them on the PPS) to the VAX, and run them through a FORTRAN conversion program or two to get them into a format that the DIO (and your hardware) can understand. Currently the following are supported [FXL]GP.FOR : 16x16 or 8x8 stamps, 4-bits deep. Automatically breaks up larger picture buffers into component stamps. Takes as input a list of .PIF files, and picture buffer lists, and produces one .INT (intermediate) file ready for post-processing. [FXL]GM.FOR : takes a .INT file and produces hardware specific .LDA files. More info in the comments (yes indeed, there are comments in this code). Use at your own risk. Best would be to talk to one of us (Kelly Turner or Franz Lanzinger) and we'll be happy to estimate the amount of work you would have to do to code your own GM, or to improve GP to handle other stamp sizes, optimize stamp use, etc. Happy crunching Franz ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RUBIN 12-MAR-1984 11:27 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: Jeff Boscole...there is hope For those of you who knew Jeff Boscole, you knew what a nut that guy could be in his letter writting. For those of you on his "mailing list", you need no more proof than to read his 6 letters a week (of some 6 pages each). For those of you who did not know Jeff, most of his writtings should be taken lightly, with an open mind and a good sense of humor. In most cases his letters simply run on and on and usually say very little! However, I just received a letter (ANOTHER!!!!) from Jeff written to the Washington State Lottery Commision regarding computer gambling! If you received your own copy, you may stop reading now. If you did not... I thought a number of you might just like to see this one. Not bad and all on one piece of paper: Dear Commisioners: I worked for several years as a professional video-game designer at Atari, Inc., and I'd like to register sentiment regarding the "newly operational" computer gambling system, curiously concidental with WPPSS #2 fire up. The video-game industry is not without ethical standards; in fact, by some, it is regarded as within the domain of "medical electronics." As game designers, we were carefully instructed to conform to rather severe standards of discipline. One of these stiff regulations concerned this area of "computer gambling" as our video-games could not be sold in many states across the nation if the game in any way could be construed as a gambling device. You will notice, for example, that no game offers "bonus games" as a reward for playing proficiency; we could merely offer "bonus lives" or "bonus time". There is another reason for these stringent gambling prohibitions. Within the programming profession there is an unwritten code of ethics derived in part from our attitudes about electronics and computer science. We feel that the nature of the computer itself is antithetical to the concept of gambling, and to promote this confustion within the public mind may become contra-indicative to the interests of justice and education. Philosophically, that arrangement destroys some fundamental cybernetic relationships by mixing up the sacred with the profane. Of course computers can produce pseudo-random numbers, however, there are many of us who, very frankly, do not want to see machines used for any gambling purposes, or to receive any such approval and authorization from the state. Also, we feel that any centralized processing arrangement incorrectly pprtrays the essence of computer science, somewhat analogous to the fundamental statements of economics which also disallow and centralization of economic theory. I am acquainted with the accounts of numerous cases within the courts in various scattered locations currently disputing the issue of gambling at remote terminals within literary discussions pertinent to our contemporary industry. As we believe computer gambling is a perversion of the design architecture, we do not support it, and those court cases may very likely find computer gambling inappropriate. Many other more suitable methods are available for exposing public consciousness to the awesome power of a computer. Also, we feel that some of the fun is subtracted from gambling by having a machine automate the gambling process. Along these lines, I an aware, for example, that some brokerage houses tried computer-regression forecasting on Wall Street and utilized some artificial-intelligence automated trabsaction routines. Since then, I understand that many of these former computer-linkups have been pulled off-line, as the stock brokers found their own trading processes more adequate and perhaps more reliable. Also, there is a danger that computer gambling might instill a psychic disestablishmentarianism which could very easily lead to social disestablishmentarianism and the annihilation of our legal system. Sincerly, Jeff Boscole (this was cc to a large list, including 2 TV stations) Personally, I think Jeff did a great job here. There may indeed be hope for him in the everyday world after all!! -Owen- ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MENCONI 12-MAR-1984 14:43 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: Boscole & gambling--I don't get it I would like to know what percentage of the Coin-op designers agree with Jeff Boscole's views about computerized gambling. I have only recently come into Coin-op so I am hardly an expert. Nevertheless, it seems to me that an electronic gambling machine that is designed to be marketed only in areas that gambling is legal should be vastly more fun than current slot machines (and head & shoulders above the electronic poker and black jack games). I would think that this would translate into vast sums of money. Perhaps this opinion shows that my moral fiber is loose weave or perhaps gambling isn't really that profitable. Either way, I hope that someone more experienced in Coin-op games will reply and set me straight. Dave ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::ALBAUGH 12-MAR-1984 16:06 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: Video Gaming I doubt that my moral fibre is more (or less) tight than the rest of those on this Junk-line, but while I have no MORAL objection to video gaming, I do have a practical one, to whit: We have enough trouble with River-City blue-noses without actually getting in bed with those who tend to control gambling in this country. One scandal, even if it did not directly include our machines, could be the foundation for outlawing video games in a lot of counties, or states. This could result in far more loss of revenue than we got in the first place from our gaming machines. Also, Bally virtually owns the gaming machine business, and are not nice people to mess (e.g. compete) with. Mike ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RUSTY 12-MAR-1984 19:03 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: Games of skill vs. games of chance On the subject of skill games vs. games of chance and ignoring (for the moment) who controls the gambling industry in this country, I find it more objectionable to waste money on a game (video or otherwise) that is based soley on luck (ie. slot machines, roullette, etc.) than to waste money on a game that involves skill. The payoff on a game based only on random events is completely pre-determined before you ever put money in it. The house determines its cut and pre-sets its machines to give payoffs accordingly. Anyone who plays a game such as this will ALWAYS lose in the long run. In addition, there is no payoff to the player other than money and the emotional rush of winning it (IF you win any). The payoff on a game that includes skill as well as luck can still be pre-adjusted to provide a desired house percentage, but unlike the completely random game, the payoffs go to those who have mastered the skill. Also, even if money is not returned, the player still receives a payoff in the form of personal satisfaction when he increases his skill level. However, someone who plays such a game MAY win in the long run. For the game of blackjack, these people are known as card counters and once identified by a gaming house are usually told not to return... This brings up one of many problems with games of skill that include monetary payoffs (ie. that those who have mastered the skill are no longer permitted to participate). This problem does not arise in the case of non-monetary payoffs (such as regular video games) in that by giving extra time or extra lives (or even extra games), only the amount of game play is extended and even the most rigourous player will eventually drop from exhaustion. Another problem exhibits itself if the game is a multi-player skill oriented game with monetary payoffs. As an example, consider a multi-player space war type game where you win money by eliminating other players and receiving what they have won so far. The house percentage could be falling into the sun. What do you suppose would happen out in the parking lot if you overheard the guy in the next console scream "I just got a ship worth $10,000!" and you had just been about to return that much to your home base before some turkey blew you out of the sky... I feel that the attraction of a skill based game with some sort of payoff is greater than a random event based game. Unfortunately, I dislike most of the side effects which would also be introduced with such a game. (The regulatory agencies of the gaming industry have a pretty tough time with just random based games!) I've rambled on long enough as it is... Randomly, Rusty P.S. The computer is only another tool and the fact that it is used in the process of gambling is irrelevent. Gambling has existed far longer than the computer. The use of computers to disguise gambling and present it as merely entertainment is something entirely different, however. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: ERNIE::MISHKIN 17-FEB-1984 14:13 To: @SYS$MAIL:COINOP Subj: Design Services Protolab The Design Services protolab will now be locked from the hours of 5:00 PM to 6:30 AM, Monday thru Friday, starting today. The lab will also be locked on weekends. To obtain access to the protolab area during these closed hours, please contact Jim Pagura, Carol Branham, or Wayne Sauter. We would recommend that Engineering personnel use the lab between the hours of 6:30 AM and 5:00 PM as much as possible. Thanks in advance for your cooperation. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::ALBAUGH 21-FEB-1984 11:58 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: Simple, but not cheap... Hi, Coin Fans!, For all of you who love to hate setting up the coin routine, Ed Logg and I have a surprise. SYS$SYSDEVICE:[UTILITIES] now has two new files, called NUCN69 and NUCN65. These new, simplified ( and more greedy ) versions of the 6809 and 6502 coin routine (respectively) have fewer options to worry about, and implement the new "no such thing as two games/coin" modes proposed by Ed for video- disk games and adopted by Marketing for all games. Documentation for the new routines can be found in DOC:NUCN69.DOC and DOC:NUCN65.DOC ( you can guess which is which ). There is also a small sample program in DOC:NCSKEL.MAC. Please give them a try and complain about any bugs. These are to be the new standards, so this constitutes the release notice. Happy Programming, Dr. Bizzarro Albaugh ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::FRANUSIC 23-MAR-1984 15:02 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: THE FUTURE AT ATARI LATELY THERE'S BEEN SOME CONFUSION OVER THE "ORGANIZATIONAL ADJUSTMENTS" THAT WE'VE BEEN EXPERIENCING HERE AT ATARI. LET'S PUT IT ALL INTO PERSPECTIVE ... AT THE END OF 1983, ATARI ANNOUNCED LOSSES OF OVER 500 MILLION DOLLARS. THERE WAS SOME TALK THAT THESE LOSSES WERE ACTUALLY CARRIED ON THE BOOKS OVER SEVERAL PRECEDING QUARTERS, AND THAT MR. MORGAN WAS SIMPLY GIVEN A FRESH START. THE FACT REMAINS THAT ATARI HAS BEEN, AND STILL IS, LOSING AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF MONEY, ENOUGH TO MAKE ANY COCAINE IMPORTER'S HEAD SPIN. THE HOME COMPUTER MARKET HAS FALLEN FLAT ON IT'S FACE. PEOPLE FINALLY REALIZED THAT THEY DIDN'T NEED A HOME COMPUTER FOR ANYTHING EXCEPT PLAYING GAMES. MOST OF THE PERCIEVED NEED FOR A HOME COMPUTER COULD ONLY BE ATTRIBUTED TO MARKETING HYPE. THE GAME CARTRIDGE MARKET HASN'T BEEN DOING MUCH BETTER. WE ALL HEARD ABOUT THE BIG HOLE IN THE GROUND WHERE THEY BURIED THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF "DEFECTIVE" CARTRIDGES. WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED WAS THAT OUR TOP MANAGEMENT "EXPERTS" OVERESTIMATED THE CARTRIDGE MARKET BY SEVERAL MILLION UNITS. MEANWHILE, SYNERTEK AND STEVIE-BOY ARE LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK $$$. AND THEN THERE'S THE COIN-OP MARKET. LET'S STOP KIDDING OURSELVES. SOME OF US WORK 10, MAYBE 12 HOURS A DAY ON GAMES WHERE THE BEST WE CAN REALISTICALLY HOPE FOR IS A TOTAL PRODUCTION OF 5000 UNITS. THAT WORKS OUT TO SOME VERY MEAGER BONUS-SPLITS, FRIENDS. FEW SIGNIFICANT CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION FACING ATARI: WARNER REPLACED MR. KASSAR WITH A CIGARETTE EXECUTIVE. UNFORTUNATELY FOR MR. MORGAN, HIGH-TECH ELECTRONICS IS A HIGHLY DYNAMIC AND VOLATILE BUSINESS TO BE IN: THE MORTALITY RATE FOR HIGH-TECH START-UPS IS VERY HIGH COMPARED TO OTHER INDUSTRIES. MR. MORGAN'S EXPERIENCE LIES IN THE VERY STABLE AND WELL-ENTRENCHED TOBBACO INDUSTRY: IT'S A REPLACEMENT MARKET WITH TEENAGERS REPLACING THE LUNG-CANCERED OLDSTERS. CIGGIES AND GAMES ARE SORT OF THE SAME... LITTLE SQUARE BOXES THAT TEENIES GET HOOKED ON. WHAT THIS ALL BOILS DOWN TO FROM AN "ENGINEERING" POINT-OF-VIEW IS THAT IT'S PROBABLY TIME TO GET ON THE VAX AND UPDATE THE RESUME. AND CONSIDERING THAT THE REST OF THE INDUSTRY IS NOW IN THE 16-BIT AND 32-BIT WORLD, IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA TO ENROLL IN A FEW GRADUATE COURSES. ( HOWARD SAMS JUST DOESN'T CUT IT ANYMORE ). FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE RECIEVING BONUS-SLPITS, IT MAKES SENSE TO GET LAYED OFF RATHER THAN QUIT, BECAUSE IF YOU GET LAYED OFF, YOU ARE LEGALLY ENTITLED TO ALL BONUS MONEY THAT YOU WOULD HAVE GOTTEN HAD YOUR EMPLOYMENT CONTINUED AT ATARI. ... HOWEVER, THINGS MAY GET SO BAD HERE IN THE NEAR FUTURE THAT IT WILL BE BETTER JUST TO QUIT ... ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MARGOLIN 23-FEB-1984 15:43 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER.UAF Subj: Math Boxes 1. Are there any new projects that use the Star Wars mathbox? 2. Are there any new projects being contemplated that will use the Star Wars mathbox. 3. Are there any new projects that use the Battlezone/Tempest Mathbox? Jed ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RUBIN 23-FEB-1984 15:57 To: KIM::MARGOLIN Subj: RE: Math Boxes ARE THERE ANY NEW PROJECTS? ___________________________________________________________________________ From: ERNIE::CAMERON 23-MAR-1984 16:41 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: PETE F..... REMEMBER WHAT AESOP SAID ABOUT SOUR GRAPES ANYONE WHO LISTENS TO THAT GIBBERISH IS A FOOL! CAROLE (I'M STAYING) JUNIOR ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RITTER 23-MAR-1984 17:02 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: PETE F..... I agree with the sour grapes analogy. Pete's attitude is like pollution: it stinks and it can spread. Jack Ritter ___________________________________________________________________________ From: BEEZ::SEGHERS 23-MAR-1984 17:05 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: COMMENTARY... Franusic has some valid points. However, what Atari does not need right now are quitters. I've seen Atari make many mistakes and I am sure that I will see many more, but, Atari is a large corporation and it is good to remember that Large corportations may stumble, but they seldom fall. There will be plenty of time to decide to quit if Atari really shows signs of colapsing. It is true that things are not what they used to be. Games are not as popular as before. The markets are glutted, both Consumer and Coin-op. That glutting cannot go on forever, however. There is a product lifetime which, once past, even the best products (for their time) cannot be sold. When the video game companies (Atari included) can no longer dump their excess inventories of old games (hopefully this will not take more that a year,) then new games can begin to go back on the market in a controlled fassion. When that time comes, we must be prepared with some VERY GOOD, VERY ORIGINAL products. Entertainment is not a fad, but repetition does not make for good entertainment. The game industry must stop cloning the old games. We must come up with original concepts. It does not necessarily mean creating bold advances in technology. It means taking bold advances in our imagination. If we can achieve that, then a games sucess is assured. John Seghers Consumer Software ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::ALBAUGH 23-FEB-1984 17:21 To: KIM::MARGOLIN Subj: RE: Math Boxes 1. Not to my knowledge. 2. not to my knowledge. 3. Not bloody likely. (considering the magnificent rewards I got for supporting it on Tempest, I am a bit reluctant to do so for any other project. Also I could almost certainly do a better job today with the TMS 320, and not get any shit about "old hardware" (not eligible for bonus). Yours confusedly, Mike ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MOORE 23-FEB-1984 17:27 To: KIM::MARGOLIN Subj: RE: Math Boxes At this time our team has no plans of using the Math Box. Rich Moore, Team 4 ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::ALBAUGH 23-FEB-1984 17:39 To: KIM::MARGOLIN Subj: RE: Math Boxes HUH???? The only patent I know of on the old math-box is my patent on the "multiple simultaneous use of bit fields". ,(oops) a feature of the old math-box which I sincerely hope you were not forced to use in the Star-Wars one. Even more perplexed-? Mike? ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RICE 24-FEB-1984 16:21 To: KIM::MARGOLIN Subj: RE: Math Boxes Are there any new projects? ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MAHAR 25-MAR-1984 14:46 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: Democracy Wall The Bubble Bursts From 1979 to 1982 Atari's growth was exponential. The money was flowing in and we were the darling of the business community. A group of congressmen who saw High-Tech as the answer to the country's economic woes adopted our name. Ray Kasar's picture was on the cover of most the major magazines in the country. There is a problem with exponential growth. If Atari's sales doubled every year our sales would have been $1 trillion by 1990 and $1 quadrillion by the year 2000. A little common sense would have indicated that that kind of growth could not be sustained and, I suppose, if you had asked our planners they would have agreed that a leveling off would be inevitable. We all seemed to be a bit too busy to worry about that at the time. In ancient Greece, a general who received bad news was allowed to kill the messenger. History does not record how reliable the mail was in those days but the temptation to minimize the bad news must have been overwhelming. If the newspaper accounts are any indication we had a very similar problem here. If a market forecast had indicated that the industry would be in the state it is in now the forecaster would have been replaced by someone with " a better attitude". This approach guarantees surprises. I think it is obvious that video games were a fad and that the fad is over. There are, however, two kinds of fads. These are exemplified by the Frisbee and the hoola hoop. In the late fifties the hoola hoop exploded on the scene with a force that is legendary to this day. For about two years everybody had to have a hoola hoop. How many hoola hoops do you see today? None. The fad ran it's course and returned to oblivion. The Frisbee, however, suffered a different fate. If gained in popularity slowly at first and then reached explosive popularity later. I'm sure Wham-o doesn't sell as many Frisbees now as it did in the late sixties but the Frisbee is now part of the standard repertoire of picnic supplies and kids still play with them. Is the video game a hoola hoop or is it a Frisbee? For all our sakes I hope it is a Frisbee. What's in the Future? Other then examining the entrails of a chicken, there seems to be no reliable method of predicting where this industry is going to go. Coin-op can make a profit and survive on what we sell to arcades. There is shake out in the arcade business right now so that avenue has dried up. This should only be temporary. The really big bucks come from street locations sales. This market seems to have vanished. Coin-op is addressing that situation and time will tell if the street market can be revived or not. I hope so, but I also think it would be unwise to count on it. We should view street sales as icing on the cake and the arcade business as our main course. Page 2 There are a couple of indications that the arcade business is going to stay around a while. Our operations end is making money. This is at a time when other arcades are losing money. Our arcades bring in the latest games. Many or our competitors do not. National surveys indicate that collections are down and I believe it is a direct result of player boredom with old games. A player survey in Play Meter magazine indicated that players will pay 1 dollar for 4 tokens at an arcade that has new games rather then get 10 tokens for a dollar at an arcade that does not. This magazine is read by almost all operators and perhaps the message will start to sink in. We have other evidence that new games generate revenue for the operator. We currently have several games on field test. The collections reports that I've read indicate that these games are earning about $100 more a week than field test games did last year. This could mean that our games are very strong or it could mean that the game playing populace is starving for new games. I believe it is a combination of both. Survival of the fittest indicates that those operator who invest in new games will survive the shake out. This trait will be selected for and we can look for reasonably level sales from these operators. Many well meaning operators are suffering a serious cash flow problem at this time. They want to buy new games but they can't. I think Atari should help them out. In the early days of the automobile the car companies realized that the customer is willing to borrow to get a new car. General Motors set up and still runs the GMAC which lends money to new car buyers. GMAC is a profit center itself and has helped GM make a great deal of money in the process. This system could work for us. Federal banking laws have been relaxed a bit lately and it may be easier to do this then it has in the past. Perhaps a cooperative venture with an established institution will serve. Thoughts on the Lay Offs I personally feel very bad about those who have lost their job recently. It is a shame that some other way couldn't have been found. I realize that a great deal of budget cutting was done before any lay off occurred. I only hope that in this chronic belt tightening we don't risk breaking off at the middle. If we are not well poised for the future, we risk repeating our mistakes. There are new markets to enter. If Atari is moving we increase our chances of hitting a moving target. I feel that new games are important. I also feel that we should be ready to create the next era in entertainment. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::SHERMAN 27-MAR-1984 11:38 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: J.B. MEMORIAL II jeff boscole lives!!!! long may vacillating versimilitudes of veracity persist??!! SUNDAY night i watched a 60 minutes article on a minneapolis ordinance to define pornography as "... any material,printed or viewed, which portrays women as the subject of violence and domination by men, in a sexual context" ( not an exact quote) . Under this ordinance, purveyors of any material of this nature could be sued in civil court, for violating the civil rights of the person suing. During the ensuing "debate" between the A.C.L.U. representative and the proponents of the bill, I was impressed by how very sick and degraded our society has become. Keep in mind that the main thrust of this bill is against so-called "snuff films", magazines that show women tied up (naked) with guns to their heads,etc. etc. ad nauseum. this was not an ordinance against portrayal of non violent sex between consenting adults. it was not the old "moral major- ityitis" at work again. this ordinance was drafted by liberal,"rabid" feminist types that are clearly not a threat as far as general cencorship goes. Still, with all that , they actually found some idiot to get up and defend the "right of expression" of these perverts. the old "where will it end" argument was pulled out and waved in our faces once again. there was no reason- able debate of the specific merits of this particular bill, but silly generic debate on freedom of speech. To me this is a good example of the thinking that could ultimately lead to the downfall of the U.S. as we know it. I call it "fear of the grayzone", and it has been responsible for innumerable follies throughout history. let me point out a few other areas where this is a problem: 1) it is currently legal to abort a fetus up to the end of the 2nd trimester (~week 27) strictly as a matter of convenience, as opposed to medical necessity. on the other hand, it is possible to save a premature infant as early as the 24th week. this has lead to "wrongful life" suits when an abortion fails, the fetus lives, and is kept alive by new medical technology. a prime example of a gray area in action. but instead of dealing with a real problem, there will be an endless debate between those who see humanity in a lump of tissue called a fertilized egg, and those who thoughtlessly consider the womans right of selfdetermination as paramount, no matter the costs ethically. 2) in the current political debate on El Salavador, the right and the left wing in this country have been polarized to almost the same extent as the actual participants. the left refuses to see (potential or real) manipulation of a just cause by our enemies, and the right refuses to see death squads and massive political corruption in the current power elite of El Salvador. the invalid "black or white" political extrapolations from the politics of this country to the very different conditions of another country is a pattern that blinds us to any valid considerations of how the gray areas in the politics of the other country need to be addressed. we need to break this pattern lest the intolerance each side associates with in the other countries politics feed back to our political arena and start a violence cycle in this country. it will do us no good if the conservatives in this country are percieved as nascient fascists by the left and the liberals are percieved as leninist symps by the right. we need to appreciate the culture of "tolerance of the gray area" that still persists in this country despite our stupid neglect. 3)etc there are examples in almost every aspect of life and 4)etc i don't want to go on too long. THE POINT is that our society is a finely tuned and balanced system, it is not purely one way or the other. this is the thing we value about our country. trying to impose rigid thought systems on a such fluidity just leads to distortions. THAT INCLUDES the rigid thought that there are no reasonable bounds on the types of thoughts and actions that can be portrayed publically. for a society to exist there is a "least common denominator", an intersection of ethics and morality that all people in that society need to agree on as the public morality. I contend that a society that hasn't the nerve to resist incursions into this area of commonality by violent perverts and deviants that can't resist an illgotten buck has too feeble a claim on existance and will soon (within a century or so ) degenerate into fascistic moral repression, or break into total anarchy. p.s. for those of you inclined to psuedo-mathematics I have formulated SHERMAN'S LAW OF MORAL MULTIPLICATIVITY: m1*m2*m3*m4*m5*m6.....*mN<=S<<<>>>>>>>>>>>> p.p.s. hint: S is not equal to 42. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RICE 27-FEB-1984 19:02 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: pome fer the day Mary had a little plane. She flew it very brisk. Now wasn't she a foolish girl Her little * ? ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RICE 29-FEB-1984 13:16 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: More time-wasters It has been suggested that lovers of sesquipedalia might like to try their hands at the creation of pomes, doggerals and limericks using some of the more esoteric words of this wonderously rich tongue of ours: The word for this week is BORBORYGMUS ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::VICKERS 29-FEB-1984 14:09 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: Long-awaited Yamaha demo For all you sys$mail:engineers out there, there will be a short demonstration of the Yamaha sound chip, personal computer, and FM voicing program at 2 P.M. this Friday, March 2, in the Multi-Purpose room. Earl ___________________________________________________________________________ From: RUBIN 7-MAR-1984 10:01 To: @LIST.DIS Subj: Open Mail Boxes!!!!! I noticed a strange thing Friday in my main directory. My mail file MAIL.MAI, which is usually protected from read access by people other than myself, was NOT protected anymore! I know that it use to be protected as I check it often. So I thought to myself...."self, maybe other peoples mail files are also unprotected!" (This appears to be some strange bug somewhere, but who knows where!!) So I checked. And sure enough, a number of people had mail files that were not protected. "What does this all mean?", you ask. What it means is that anyone, regardless of any system or other privileges, may copy or type YOUR mail file. If you have letters in any of these files you would rather other people not be able to read, you should change the protection on these files. In case you are not familiar with the procedure, here is what you do: $SET PROT=(W,G) MAIL.MAI What this does is turn OFF access for "WORLD" and "GROUP". WORLD is everyone but yourself. This means anybody! GROUP is anyone with the same first 3 digits of your process id. Most everybody is in their OWN group, but there are a few cases where people share groups. If you don't want others in your group to read your mail, this should also be turned off. For more information on ACCESS PROTECTION, type HELP SPECIFY PROTECTION. If you are receiving this letter, the above applies to you. I only did a check on the file MAIL.MAI, but I checked ALL sub-directories as well. It is possible that a MAIL.MAI file is listed as unprotected but exists in a protected directory. If that is the case, you don't need to change the file itself. If you wish to check other files and protect them as well, you can check their PROTECTION code by doing a DIR/PROT on the directory. (Once again see HELP SPECIFY PROTECTION if your not sure what all the symbols mean.) Any questions may be referred back to me! Owen ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::BRAD 7-MAR-1984 10:39 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: AMY 1 sound processor pricing. The following is a memo from George Wang (ASG) and Sam Nicolino (R&D) regarding AMY 1 chip pricing. Excellent ASG chip plan and layout design activities have resulted in a significant reduction in AMY 1 chip size. This results in an average sales price (ASP) drop of $3.00 per part! Therefore, the current ASP for the AMY 1 chip is revised to $8.82. If you have any question about the specifications, please contact Sam Nicolino at 745-2734 or George Wang at 745-2119. - brad - ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::SHEPPERD 8-MAR-1984 14:48 To: @sys$mail:junk Subj: What the #@%^ is SYS$MAIL? In case you've been wondering how the SYS$MAIL lists work because you never knew or you just plain forgot, here is an updated description. A mail distribution list is simply a file that contains a list of VAX usernames to whom you want your message distributed. Each VAX contains in its directory SYS$MAIL a select group of distribution lists that automatically get updated each time a person is added to a system. The usernames are collected in groups (some aribtrary, some based on job function) and two lists for each group are created. One list, the .DIS file, contains the list of all users on all systems in the network that fall into the group and the other list, the .UAF file, contians the list of users only on the host system. You are free to use the distribution lists located on any system in the network. The following is a list of group types that have been established on all systems in the network. The "real people" refers to regular users. Non "real people" are those like DECNET, SYSTEM, FIELD, etc. Your choices for names of lists are: COINOP All real people who have accounts. JUNK All real people who don't mind junk mail. WPUSERS MUSE people (Publications and secretaries) SCUSER Sci-Cards people ENGINEER All COINOP people who arent WPUSERS or SCUSERs. (before you ask, ENGINEER includes programmers too) CAD IC design people UNIX People who have expressed an interest in the UNIX O/S. ??????? More to come, watch this space You have to ask to have your name included in UNIX or excluded from JUNK. For example: if your host system is KIM and you want to send mail to JUNK, (basically everyone in the network) then to MAIL's prompt "To:" respond: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK (MAIL uses a default distribution list file type of .DIS) If you only wanted your mail to go only to the JUNK collectors on KIM, then type: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK.UAF It gets confusing beyond this, but you could also send mail to users on a specific system by including the node name. For example if your host system is KIM and you want to send JUNK mail only to the user's on GRUMPY, then type: @GRUMPY::SYS$MAIL:JUNK.UAF You should be aware that the JUNK.DIS (as well as all other .DIS files) in SYS$MAIL on all systems are equivalent. That is, putting a node name on any .DIS file only results in making the mailing take longer (the system has to go to the remote node first to get the master list instead of looking on the host system for the same list). Confused? You won't be after the next episode.... Happy mailing, ('cept to the one called KIM::RICE) ds ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::MCCARTHY 8-MAR-1984 18:22 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: Programs and coins. I notice that Dr. Bizzarro has just released a 'new improved' version of COIN65. I would like to add my two bits to help avoid some future problems. The U.S. monetary system is rather simple and can adequately be covered by even a subset of the coin options available in COIN65 or NUCN65. However, on the international scene, virtiually every one of these options is required by some country or another. So PLEASE do not put anything in your programs to restrict these options. Case in point is Firefox. This game has a two credit minimum that can not be defeated by option switch. This restriction effectively halves the number of options available. The guy that wants left mech = one game right mech = five games is s.o.l. So again I say, even if people would gladly pay a dollar to play your game, please don't restrict the options. pat. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::ALBAUGH 8-MAR-1984 22:34 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: Remote ATari Peripheral Interchange Program (RATPIP) Dave Shepperd and I are working on a file transfer utility that can up- or download files from the 800 to the VAX. It will work similarly to the existing MDxx, TTVAX, DNLD, or whatever it's called this week, which Dave Getreu's group has been using. Now here's the problem: We would like to support text files too, but we aren't sure what translation of ASCII to ATASCII will be least harmful. In the absence of input from you folks, we will implement the ATPIP conversion, with the exception that any files sent up to the VAX will be type "stream_lf" (unix), because Dave is writing the VAX end in C and thats what it writes. Other possibilities include full conversion to ASCII, including stripping D7 (no inverse video), sending "carriage-return,linefeed", etc. Or do we just give up? Please send suggestions to me via VAXmail. Mike p.s. just to forestall the inevitable, yes we have considered the XMODEM (alias MODEM7, AMODEM, Christensen protocol, etc.), but the actual first customers for this beast have a PDP-11 running TSX, and it doesn't like 8-bit "ascii", so nogo. ___________________________________________________________________________ From: ERNIE::CAMERON 9-MAR-1984 11:17 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: A VIEW FROM A BROAD IF IT'S FUN, THEN IT'S BAD FOR YOU I wondered when someone would get around to blaming video games for inciting violence in children. So far the electronic screen has been blamed for loss of appetite, tennis wrist, sexual transference and the seduction of a minor. Adults are like that. Everytime a kid is having a good time, eating something that tastes good, or wearing something comfortable, there has to be something wrong with it. Frankly, I don't see video games as being any more mind-controlling than their fathers sitting spellbound before 86 football games a week or their mothers mesmerized by four hours of soaps a day. You wanta talk violence? I can tell stories about games past that will make your hair stand on end. In 1943, my mother grabbed a Chinese checkers board with both hands, threw the marbles all over the kitchen and crashed it over my father's head, claiming, "I will not play with thieves!" In 1954, my husband and I were playing Monopoly with a few friends. Knowing full well that I was down to my last $50, he demanded $3,060 when I landed on one of his utilities. When I tried to reason with him he just snickered and said, "You're out! Why don't you just go out and get the chip dip and snacks?" Had we not the children to consider, I don't like to think what would have happened. There are so many things in our lives that have an effect on children, I wouldn't know what to take away. If you don't want them to see violence, you better hide Hansel and Gretel. If you don't want them to see sex, don't let them see a pregnant woman. If you don't want them to know terror, protect them from Halloween; or hypocrisy, tell them Santa Claus doesn't exist. If you don't want them to be frightened by monsters and things that go bump in the night, cut down the large tree in front of the house that makes weird shadows on their walls when the lights are out and brushes against the spouting. If you don't want them to see war and suffering, throw your body in front of the TV set for the six o'clock news. The other day I saw two brothers fighting for control. One boy yelled, "It's my turn!" The other one said, "Would you flake off?" THe first one said "I'm telling Mom!" and gave him an elbow in the ribs. The second one said, "Get out of my face," and ground his foot into his. A video game? Nope. A fight over a hymnal in church! - Erma Bombeck ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::RUBIN 9-MAR-1984 11:29 To: @SYS$MAIL:JUNK Subj: Lazy Mail review In response to a number of requests for info on the lazy man's entry to mail, here is the procedure. If you already have this working you should read the warnings section only. This feature is currently NOT on SNEEZY or GRUMPY, and Im not sure if I put it on BEEZ or not. If anyone on those systems has an interest, let me know and Ill add the needed changes! This "feature" will take you directly to mail at login time (or restart) if you have received new mail since the last time you ENTERED mail. ( See Warnings below). 1). Near the end of your LOGIN.COM file (I suggest AFTER everything that types stuff is completed), add the following line: $ @SYS$SYSDEVICE:[UTILITIES.COM]MAILCK 2). Near the top of LOGIN.COM (BUT at least before the above line) add the following line: $ MAIL :==@SYS$SYSDEVICE:[UTILITIES.COM]MAIDIR Now, every time you login, if new mail has been received, you will be placed directly in MAIL. ALWAYS leave mail with an 'EX' (normal exit, not CTRL-Y) Note: It is possible that after you have added all this that you will enter mail on your next login even if no new messages have been received. This is normal and will happen only once! WARNINGS: A). This does not really check for new mail, it simply looks to see if the revision number of the current mail file matches the number from the last time you were in mail. If you enter mail then leave without reading anything, the revision is updated and you will NOT enter MAIL even if your are told you have new messages, unless additional messages have been received! B). If you use BATCH, then a conditional branch must be made about line 1 which calls MAILCK. If you never use BATCH, skip to item C. If you already have an area of LOGIN.COM for "INTERACTIVE" items only, put the line in that section. If the last sentence appears to be GREEK to you, then add line 1 (from above) as follows: $ IF "''F$MODE()'" .NES. "INTERACTIVE" THEN GOTO SKIP_CHECK $ @SYS$SYSDEVICE:[UTILITIES.COM]MAICK $ SKIP_CHECK: C). Note that this re-defines the word MAIL to call a special COM file. Mail will still work as it always has, however, this COM file will display a list of all your mail files when you type MAIL. To skip the list, simply add anything after the word MAIL. (ie: MAIL N) D). Since this ONLY re-defines the word MAIL, it you try to get to mail in any other way (ie: MAI, MAILS), then the COM file is NOT executed. In this case, you will enter mail on next login even if no new mail was received! E). These additions in no way effect LETTERBOM. If you have made that change, it will still work as expected. If you have not made that change, you probably dont care what this means anyway! F). When using this, a new "file" will appear in your directory. It will be called MAIL.RVN. Do not remove this file. It uses only 1 to 3 blocks. If you do remove it, MAIL will simply put it back and you will enter mail on your next login even if no new messages. Problems should be mailed back to me! Thanks Owen ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::FXL 10-MAR-1984 13:49 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER hello LINKM users, I jut came across a truly nasty bug/feature in LINKM. (make that just). In my .LNK file I have several lines of files with /C (for continuation) at the end. The last line of course doesn't have one. That is until you hurriedly delete that line without thinking, which is what I did. That makes the previous line the last line, and that of course HAD a /C at the end. Now for the bug. LINKM doesn't complain about the superfluous /C on the last line, it just doesn't make a .LDA file. It took me two days before I realized that I was down- loading my old .LDA file, rather than my new one. Now that you know, maybe this will decrease the chances of this happening to you. Franz ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::BABCOCK 12-MAR-1984 09:04 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: Yet another PPS utility I have just completed a PPS utility to compress unwanted (duplicate) stamps out of a set of stamps. The utility is called COMPRESS (presently located in [BABCOCK.PPS]) and takes as input a .INT file (generated by FXL's GP program). The stamp size (in multiple of 4 pixels) is also specified. The utility creates a new, smaller .INT file (how small depends on the reduction in stamps) and a .MAC file containing a translation table between the old stamps and the new stamps. See the file [BABCOCK.PPS]COMPRESS.DOC for further information. I have also modified GP to accept a stamp size. This allows GP to do both row-oriented (playfield stamps) and column-oriented (mo stamps) conversions for any square stamp (multiple of 4 pixels). This version of GP can also be found in [BABCOCK.PPS]. To see the result of these new utilities, drop by the Garfield lab (Joe's Bar 'N Grill), or see me. edb ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::VICKERS 12-MAR-1984 11:28 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: and now the bad news Apparently the price estimate that Yamaha quoted for their chip set didn't quite cover their costs. I was first told that they were going to stick to the $15.70 they had quoted me, but the new word is that the very embarassed Yamaha manager is in hot water with his bosses, and the new price is $19.30, FOB Japan. I personally think the chip is well worth the extra $3.60, but if this is going to change anyone's mind about using it, please let me know so we can make intelligent guesses about quantities. Sincelely, Earl ___________________________________________________________________________ From: KIM::VICKERS 21-MAR-1984 14:24 To: @SYS$MAIL:ENGINEER Subj: TI speech option, Yamaha&Pokey clock rates Does your game have trouble reproducing the speech patterns of females and (other) alien life forms? If so, you may wish to avail yourself of the 10 kHz sample rate option. The current sample rate is 8 kHz, which is optimal for male voice and requires less memory storage. To use the 10 kHz option, you must: 1) Change the clock for the TI 5220 from 640 kHz to 800 kHz. 2) You may need to adjust any lowpass filter for the speech output, as the new bandwidth will be 5 kHz instead of 4 kHz. The cutoff frequency can have a big effect on how the speech sounds - see me for details. 3) Tell us to analyze your speech at the 10 kHz rate, and to have RPM call the speech routine a little more often. (The new frame period is 20 ms instead of 25 ms.) 4) Allow for 25% more rom storage (I would let this be a deciding factor only if there is little difference between the sound quality at the 8 and 10 kHz rates.) If you're unsure which rate to use, or if you have sound effects or a mix of male and female voices you wish to try, we can try it both ways and see which sounds best. While we're on the subject of clock speeds, Brad mentions that since the Yamaha chip needs a 3.579545451 mHz (colorburst crystal) clock speed, it will be easy to derive the 1.7etcetc mHz clock to run the pokeys at the speed at which they run on the 800, so that the sounds we develop on the 800 development system won't sound diffe